Sign in to follow this  
[TNT] Sonic Goo

A blond Bond?

19 posts in this topic

This week will finally see the premiere of the new Bond. And with new, I mean new. Out go the gadgets and the puns, in comes a bit of grit and some interesting fresh influences. First reviews are good. But then, they always are (critics being lenient in return for exclusivity). Will you go see it? What are you expecting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll wait for the DVD (like most parents of small kids, I guess!). I'm a little confused as to how they'll present the very first Bond story as taking place here in modern times? And what's this you say, Goo, about no gadgets? If they're not going to take advantage of modern technology by having the ludicrous gadgets we all know and love, what's the point of setting it in modern times?!?!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to see it and I'm praying it'll not let me down. I love Bond movies, always see them in the movies, and I'm prepared to accept the newest one even if he should have at least dyed his hair to brown. Blonde Bond. Ugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok...this is one of the best Bond movies...it is simply awesome!!!!

 

ps.: Eva Green is hawt!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion there will never be a better james bond than Sean Connery he looks the part so it doesnt matter what colour the bond is Sean Connery always the best

 

 

MyThiX-;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It goes without saying that Sean Connery with always be the ultimate James Bond, and the one whom the others will be compared to...but Daniel Craig in this one film manages to come VERY close to the level of Sean Connery. In this one film, mind you. I honestly believe that if his work on the next films is as good as it was in Casino Royale, that he will far surpass Sean Connery as the best James Bond. Well, at least in my eyes anyways :D

 

This movie is incredible. I highly, HIGHLY recommend it if you guys haven't seen it yet. It is different than the other films before it, but the changes are exactly what the series needed...especially after the awful Die Another Day that came out a few years back. There's a definite realistic, gritty approach to the movie and for once (and this is something that has hardly ever been expressed in these movies) you relate to Bond. You feel emotion for him, and he actually seems human. That's what is so interesting, I think, with this movie. You get to see him make mistakes, feel remorse over what he does, and see the actions that cause him to become the suave, cold, super-agent we all know. Throughout the movie, there's a slow growth to the character, and I love it.

 

Ahh! I could gush forever about this, but I'll save it for now ;) Suffice to say that it's an excellent piece of film and everyone should check it out while it's still around :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

even though I was sceptical at first I really enjoyed that movie. Some of the plot twists were unpredictable and unnecessary though. Craig makes a pretty good Bond after all. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry guys, I didn't like it. Daniel Craig did a great job...no issues with the acting but the part I didn't like is how they turned Bond into an aassassin. Bond was supposed to be the witty character who used his head to get out of sticky situations, had great gadgets, swooned the ladies, etc....sure a thug or two might meet their maker when they attacked him, but Bond's mission mission was never to be an assassin. Great movie, but not a bond movie - my guess is they used the Bond franchise name to sell the movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry guys, I didn't like it. Daniel Craig did a great job...no issues with the acting but the part I didn't like is how they turned Bond into an aassassin. Bond was supposed to be the witty character who used his head to get out of sticky situations, had great gadgets, swooned the ladies, etc....sure a thug or two might meet their maker when they attacked him, but Bond's mission mission was never to be an assassin. Great movie, but not a bond movie - my guess is they used the Bond franchise name to sell the movie.

I couldn't have said it better myself RXS. The best way I can explain our opinion is exactly how you compare the difference from NOLF2 and Contract CRAP...I mean, Contract JACK. In Contract JACK, you do nothing but play a few ripped off and stitched together maps from nolf2 and basically do nothing but kill people all the way to the end of the game, and it's over. That's fine, there's room for games like that, but not any that should be assosiated with NOLF2. If you like that in a game, play Max Payne, or COD, or Far Cry, or any of the other 1 million nitty gritty shoot em up games that are out there (those are just my favorites).

 

I felt Casino Royal was a great action movie, but nothing more than that. It hardly had anything in it that a bond movie should have. I found that actually a lot of people that I know who watched the film felt that this was a good thing. I disagree though. W/o the regular Bond elements, it is in no way different than any other stereotypical action flics that Hollywood shats out of their mega ritch @%#es every year. Again, nothing wrong with nitty gritty action flics, (I love them as much as the next guy) but the way they did Casino Royal just doesn't suit the Bond series. I mean, come on! Where the heck was Q and Money-penny? Where is Bond's lame but yet kinda funny comebacks? Did anyone see any gadgets at all in this film? What a piece of crap. Sorry guys, I just have to stand firm with this opinion. I didn't really like Die Another Day, especially when compared to Golden Eye, but it still rules supreme over this new steaming pile of goat poop. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok...this is one of the best Bond movies...it is simply awesome!!!!

 

ps.: Eva Green is hawt!

I've gotta disagree. Not *one* of the best, just the best! Best Bond Movie, Best Bond (sorry Sean!), hottest Bond girl.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've gotta disagree. Not *one* of the best, just the best! Best Bond Movie, Best Bond (sorry Sean!), hottest Bond girl.

 

LOL! You're crazy!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL! You're crazy!

Word ;)!

Edited by METAL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've finally taken the plunge and seen it and the verdict is... good!

 

When M called Bond a "a sexist, misogynist dinosaur" in Goldeneye, she was right. Though they did manage to squeeze one or two good movies out of him, his era was over. Sometimes things simply date, and then they either die or get reinvented. That's why we no longer have the Carry On.. style comedy and now have the American Pie style comedy. Especially the Austin Powers movies highlighted the sillyness of the whole thing. The villain extensively explaining his grand scheme before trying to kill Bond in an overly elaborate manner without caring for the outcome... it just had to go. It was turning into camp. I don't want to watch a Bond movie and think 'Oh behave!'.

 

The black and white prelude set the stage nicely, and I really, really liked the construction scene. Reminded me of NOLF1. It was both modern (the above mentioned parcours techniques) and yet very Bond (the improvisational fighting with whatever the surroundings provide). And speaking of which, the locations were chosen excellently. The true classic, stylish Bond world. The details were mostly right, too - of course Bond travels per high speed train, not by plane. Though the prominent product placement really has to go. The Ford in the Bahamas and the Sony Ericsson gadgets should really be CGI'd out for future generations. Bond should be above that. Beforehand I wasn't very excited about the idea of a high stakes card game as the center point of the movie, but they pulled it off nicely. (The defibrillator was a bit too deus ex machina for me, though it's not too illogical.) The happily ever after scenes were a bit boring, but the fact that you already knew it couldn't last made it acceptable. The final fight was inspired and I was suprised to find the ending left me wanting more after a relatively long movie. The reason for this, I think, was Bond himself.

 

There is still humour there, I liked the references to the old Bond (the ending line, the "Every penny" and especially the shaken or stirred one). Arguably the most interesting one was, where in the past it was the sexy women emerging from the water, this time it was a bulging Bond. And they still managed to squeeze a hot babe in the scene. Everybody happy. The one that most defined the new Bond himself, though, was the 'nearly killed me' one. Why? Because it was a typical oldfashioned Bond line but this time it was the darkest of black, delivered with the icy cold of the professional killer. And, for those who don't know this, this is the real Bond. As Ian Fleming meant it, not what the movies made him. Bond is not a suave upper class gentlemen. He moves around in those circles, yes, but it's not his world - just his hunting ground. The profiling game with Vesper was basically a bit of exposition, for those who wouldn't get it implicitly. Sure, he likes the style, the lush surroundings, the Rolex - sorry, Omega - but he knows it's just show. When M says Bond is just a 'blunt instrument', she's right. But what emerges in this movie is that he's also a complicated human being. And that's what this movie is about in the end - what makes Bond tick.

 

Some of the old Bondness is still there, some of it isn't. But what matters, and what makes this movie compelling, is Bond himself. And that's why it succeeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like what you said Goo, and I think you made some great points that I wasn't aware of. I still have to argue that even though what your saying about Bond being more of a dark killer rather than a suave upper class gentleman being true, it changes the theme that seperates Bond movies from any other unoriginal action shooter movie. (in my opinion) What I'm saying, is that despite their efforts to make a better bond they pretty much cut out the important elements that separate him from any other average joe assasine of today's Hollywood movies.

 

Perhaps people are getting tired of the dry humor and corny remarks, but I personally expect them when I see a bond movie. That, and the gadgets. I think they should have kept more of that in but also add some realism to it and darkness as they apparently did in Casino Royal. If I want to see a cold hearted killer go and kill some bad guys, I'll watch The Punisher, or maybe The Transporter, or maybe crank or how about Borne Identity. The list could go on until I get grey hairs.

 

All I'm saying is that the line that seperates Bond from other action films has really smuged in this movie. :) That's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goo, I swear you're a walking talking thesis. In the good sense!

 

Is it really a good argument that this new Bond is more like Ian Fleming's Bond, though?

 

I've never read any Ian Fleming novels and assume I have the majority of Bond movie viewers with me in that. Mr. Fleming created his Bond more than 50 years ago. To turn back more than 20 motion pictures of character building (or lack thereof) because it's somehow "going back to the roots", well.

 

I guess it depends on whether you consider the novels or the movies the root. I'd say the movies have taken a life of their own, and thus suddenly changing James Bond's character and the formulaic plot is a mistake and a turn for the worse. I agree with Trig: Casino Royale is an exciting action movie, but nonetheless an ordinary action movie. James Bond is supposed to be more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goo, I swear you're a walking talking thesis. In the good sense!

 

Is it really a good argument that this new Bond is more like Ian Fleming's Bond, though?

 

I've never read any Ian Fleming novels and assume I have the majority of Bond movie viewers with me in that. Mr. Fleming created his Bond more than 50 years ago. To turn back more than 20 motion pictures of character building (or lack thereof) because it's somehow "going back to the roots", well.

 

I guess it depends on whether you consider the novels or the movies the root. I'd say the movies have taken a life of their own, and thus suddenly changing James Bond's character and the formulaic plot is a mistake and a turn for the worse. I agree with Trig: Casino Royale is an exciting action movie, but nonetheless an ordinary action movie. James Bond is supposed to be more.

Well said Spacko. A kiss for you! :wub:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this